What Counts as Evidence for Interactional Competence? Developing Rating Criteria for a German Classroom-Based Paired Speaking Test

Author(s):  
Katharina Kley
2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-188
Author(s):  
Lyn May ◽  
Fumiyo Nakatsuhara ◽  
Daniel Lam ◽  
Evelina Galaczi

In this paper we report on a project in which we developed tools to support the classroom assessment of learners’ interactional competence (IC) and provided learning oriented feedback in the context of preparation for a high-stakes face-to-face speaking test. Six trained examiners provided stimulated verbal reports ( n = 72) on 12 paired interactions, focusing on interactional features of candidates’ performance. We thematically analysed the verbal reports to inform a draft checklist and materials, which were then trialled by four experienced teachers. Informed by both data sources, the final product comprised the following: (a) a detailed IC checklist with nine main categories and over 50 sub-categories, an accompanying detailed description of each area and feedback to learners, which teachers can adapt to suit their teaching and testing contexts; and (b) a concise IC checklist with four categories and bite-sized feedback for real-time classroom assessment. Interactional competence, a key aspect of face-to-face communication, is under-researched and under-explored in second/foreign language teaching, learning, and assessment contexts. This in-depth treatment of it, therefore, stands to contribute to learning contexts through raising teachers’ and learners’ awareness of micro-level features of the construct, and to assessment contexts through developing a more comprehensive understanding of the construct.


2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 151-174
Author(s):  
Linda Borger

The operationalization of interactional competence (IC) within the paired speaking test format allows for a range of interactional skills to be tested. However, in terms of assessment, challenges are posed with regard to the co-constructed nature of IC, making investigations into raters’ perceptions of the construct essential to inform test score interpretation. This qualitative study explores features of IC that raters attended to as they evaluated performances in a paired speaking test, part of a Swedish national test of English as a Foreign Language (EFL). Two groups of raters, 17 EFL teachers from Sweden, using national standards based on the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR), and 14 raters from Finland and Spain, using CEFR scales, rated six audio-recorded paired performances, and provided written comments to explain their scores and account for salient features. The findings of the content analysis indicate that raters attended to three main interactional resources: topic development moves, turn-taking management, and interactive listening strategies. As part of the decision-making process, raters also considered the impact of test-takers’ interactional roles and how candidates’ performances were interrelated. In the paper, interaction strategies that were perceived as more or less successful by raters are highlighted. The findings have implications for our understanding of raters’ operationalization of IC in the context of paired speaking tests, and for the development of rating scales and guidelines that reflect the social dimensions of the construct.


2009 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 397-421 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lyn May

The definition and operationalization of interactional competence in speaking tests that entail co-construction of discourse is an area of language testing requiring further research. This article explores the reactions of four trained raters to paired candidates who oriented to asymmetric patterns of interaction in a discussion task. Through an analysis of candidate discourse combined with rater notes, stimulated verbal recalls, rater discussions and scores awarded for interactional effectiveness, the article examines the extent to which raters compensate or penalize candidates for their role in co-constructing asymmetric interactional patterns. The article argues that key features of the interaction are perceived by the raters as mutual achievements, and it further suggests that the awarding of shared scores for interactional competence is one way of acknowledging the inherently co-constructed nature of interaction in a paired speaking test.


2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 357-375
Author(s):  
Steven Ross

Interactional competence has been variously defined as turn-taking ability, paralinguistic features of communication such as eye contact, gesture, and gesticulation, and listener responses. In existing assessment systems such as the oral proficiency interview (OPI), interactional competence is only rarely explicitly factored into the holistic task-based rating system. The present article explores the potential relevance of a facet of interactional competence, listener response, in contrastive interviewers conducted structurally distinct languages, Japanese and English. The analytic focus through micro-analysis of the interview interaction aims to consider evidence of how the candidate’s listener responses audible through backchannels might be consistently identified as distinct from existing rating criteria such as fluency, accuracy, and coherence, and whether listener responses as interactional competence might be distinct from, or subsumable under, these facets of speaker proficiency.


Author(s):  
Meryanti Napitupulu And Anni Holila Pulungan

This study was conducted as an attempt to discover the effect of applying Demonstration Method on students’ achievement in speaking skill. It was an experimental research. The subject was students of Grade XII, Vocational High School (Sekolah Menengah Kejuruan: SMK), which consisted of 79 students. The research was divided into two groups: experimental and control groups. The instrument used to collect the data was speaking test. To obtain the reliability of the test, the writer applied Kuder Richardson 21 formula. The result of the reliability was 0.7, and it was found that the test was reliable. The data were analyzed by using t-test formula. The analysis showed that the scores of the students in the experimental group were significantly higher than the scores of the students in the control group at the level of significant m = 0.05 with the degree of freedom (df) 77, t-observed value 8.9 > t-table value 1.99. The findings indicate that using Demonstration Method significantly affected the students’ achievement in speaking skill. So, English teachers are suggested to use Demonstration Method in order to improve students’ achievement in speaking skill.


Author(s):  
Dita Masyitah Sianipar And Sumarsih

This study deals with the way to improve students’ achievement in speaking particularly through Two Stay Two Stray Strategy. This study was conducted by using classroom action research. The subject of of the research was class X-AP SMK Swasta Harapan Danau Sijabut in Asahan Regency that consisted of 34 students. The research was conducted in two cycles consisted of three meetings in each cycle. The instruments of collecting data for quantitative data used Speaking Test and instrument for analysis of qualitative data used observation, interview and questionnaire sheet. Based on the speaking test score, students’ score kept improving in every test. In the test I the mean was 61,47, in the test II the mean was 67,41 and the test III the mean was 78,52. Based on observation sheet and questionnaire sheet, it was found that teaching learning process run well and lively. Students were active and interest in speaking. The using of Two Stay Two Stray Strategy is significantly improved students’ achievement in speaking.


Author(s):  
Ramadhayani Fitri Nasution And Busmin Gurning

The objective of this study was to investigate whether the application of Teams-Games-Tournament Technique improve the students achievement in Speaking. This study was an classroom action research. The subject of this study was class XI IPA 3 SMA Muhammadiyah 8 Kisaran which consists of 35 students. The study was conducted in two cycles, cycle I consisted of three meetings and cycle II was consisted of three meetings. The instruments for collecting data were quantitative (oral speaking test) and qualitative data (observation sheet and diary note). Based on speaking scores, students’ score kept improving in every evaluation and based on observation sheet and diary note, it was found that teaching and learning process ran well. Students could enlarge their thinking process. The result of this study showed that Teams-Games-Tournament improved students’ achievement in speaking.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document